The tally is relentlessly grim: a whole settlement wiped out in Trinity County “excepting a few children”; an Indian girl raped and left to die somewhere near Mendocino; as many as 50 killed at Goose Lake; and, two months later, as many as 257 murdered at Grouse Creek, scores of them women and children. There were the four white ranchers who tracked down a band of Yana to a cave, butchering 30. “In the cave with the meat were some Indian children,” reported a chronicle published later. One of the whites “could not bear to kill these children with his 56-calibre Spencer rifle. ‘It tore them up so bad.’ So he did it with his 38-calibre Smith and Wesson revolver.”

There have been books written about the systematic slaughter of California Indians, but none as gruesomely thorough as Benjamin Madley’s An American Genocide, from which the above accounts come. He estimates that between 9,000 and 16,000 Indians, though probably many more, were killed by vigilantes, state militiamen and federal soldiers between 1846 and 1873, in what he calls an “organized destruction” of the state’s largely peaceful indigenous peoples.

When User A can post what ever they want but block User B, C, or D from responding to that post (through ignore), that's not an open conversation or free speech.

Ah, you're referring to the "hide me from that guy" part of ignore. (When you ignore a user, he disappears for you, but your comments also disappear from his view, at least while he's logged in.) Neither one can see the other.

So you're saying that since you can't see what Dan is saying when you're logged in, you don't get a chance to reply to what he's saying. I can see your point.

The reason that ignore is mutual is because people were uncomfortable using the ignore option if they felt the guy was then mocking their comments without their knowledge. So making ignore mutual seemed like a good idea, and so far it does seem to have encouraged people to use the ignore function and maybe chilled the flame wars a little.

I don't want to stifle debate, but maybe some individuals just should not interact with each other if there's no hope of their ever getting along. That doesn't stop you from saying anything you want to to everyone else.

Why is it that you are putting forth reasoned arguments here but act like a child when actually responding to people's posts day-to-day? I take it that you want ignore removed so you can troll more people rather than really wanting a 'back and forth display of opinions on a topic.'

The point is, white, western Europeans did so much more with the country than the Indians ever would have.

"Doing more" is relative and a matter of opinion. Nonetheless, if I promise to do more with your property and resources, I assume you will have no problem with me taking them. In fact, that is the one defense that will get one off for having robbed a bank.

"Doing more" is relative and a matter of opinion. Nonetheless, if I promise to do more with your property and resources, I assume you will have no problem with me taking them. In fact, that is the one defense that will get one off for having robbed a bank.

Pick your culture. Western culture or native American culture which included ample amounts of blood sacrifice and cannibalism. Relative indeed!

Francis Parkman, who was undoubtedly a product of his era, went into graphic detail describing the act of cannibalism amongst the American Indians. Particularly, after the battle of Fort William Henry where the Ottawa tribesman feasted on their English captives much to the horror of the French, who were powerless to stop them.

"...He Presently saw a large number of them squatted about a fire, before which meat was roasting on sticks stuck in the ground; and approaching, he saw that it was the flesh of an Englishman, other parts of which were boiling in a kettle, while near by sat eight or ten of the prisoners, forced to see their comrade devoured. The horror stricken priest began to remonstrate, on which a young savage fiercely replied in broken French: "You have French taste, I have Indian. This is good meat for me."; and the feasters pressed him to share it."

No. I like clean water and air and trees and wildlife. And while I might work from dusk to dawn, I think it would be a better life.

So you are also in favor of the elimination of about 260,000,000 people to return the North American continent to it's limited farming/hunter-gatherer carrying capacity?

Pollution is a function of population and the Western world, better than any culture on earth, has managed to eliminate most of the harmful effects of large population and pollution.

Do you know why the Aztecs were in decline? Why the Inca and the Maya were almost extinct when Spain showed up? It's because they were incapable of sustainable farming and they destroyed their environment. There's a book called "Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed" that you need to read immediately.

You might also ask yourself why in 20,000 years of occupation, natives in North America existed in such small numbers. The real reason is that they were incapable of dealing with their own depletion of natural resources. It's a fact that's well studied and well supported.

Why would you be entitled to do that? I started with nothing. I worked at Jack in the Box and pumped gasoline. I couldn't afford to go to college until I was 30. My wealth belongs to me and only the events from 1966 onward leading to the acquisition of that wealth are relevant to any conversation.

Corrected: I started with nothing. I worked at Jack in the Box and pumped gasoline. I married a rich lawyer.

So you're saying that since you can't see what Dan is saying when you're logged in, you don't get a chance to reply to what he's saying. I can see your point.

With all due respect, Patrick, that's not his point. His point is that he can't at will force Dan to see him. That's what sends him into fits. Free speech is always required to accommodate privacy. A moron in America gets to yell his bilge but he isn't allowed to pierce the personal veil of privacy. It's to your credit that such a degree of privacy is supported on this forum. It's funny how Republicans cry about having to see homosexuals act like homosexuals, "forced viewing" it was called, but cry foul when they can't force others to watch them take a dump on stage.

How about an annual "IgnoreFree" day where all 'ignores' are disabled?

I'm thinking that perhaps ignores should time out after a year. People change, maybe they'll get along after that. And one click year isn't too much work if you want to ignore someone again.

In The Evolution of Cooperation ( https://www.amazon.com/Evolution-Cooperation-Robert-Axelrod/dp/0465021212 ) Axelrod proves that tit-for-tat is the best strategy for dealing with Prisoner's Dilemma in theory, but occasional attempts to cooperate after the other side has "defected" (as he puts it) might manage to establish mutual cooperation, which is the best for everyone.

Hoe about something like this: "Our country has profited greatly from taking other people's land and resources, and killing them in the process. I say we return to these tried and true roots of what made us great, and so, fellow Americans, if elected....."

Hoe about something like this: "Our country has profited greatly from taking other people's land and resources, and killing them in the process. I say we return to these tried and true roots of what made us great, and so, fellow Americans, if elected....."

I say we maintain our constitution, capitalism and democracy. Our true wealth and prosperity will be derived, not from stealing other peoples wealth, but by producing wealth through hard and smart work. Lets give every citizen a chance to succeed without giving them handouts.

I say we maintain our constitution, capitalism and democracy. Our true wealth and prosperity will be derived, not from stealing other peoples wealth, but by producing wealth through hard and smart work. Lets give every citizen a chance to succeed without giving them handouts.

I dunno. Without the killing, raping and stealing part, I am afraid this will not sell.

I say we maintain our constitution, capitalism and democracy. Our true wealth and prosperity will be derived, not from stealing other peoples wealth, but by producing wealth through hard and smart work. Lets give every citizen a chance to succeed without giving them handouts.

I dunno. Without the killing, raping and stealing part, I am afraid this will not sell.

In that case, lets take all the Saudi oil and give it to all humans. Natural resources belong to all humans.